C2 EZ RE THE WASHINGTON POST.TUESDAY, MAY 17 , 2022
about to take?
A: I’m going to approach it in the
same way I have approached all
of my other judicial
appointments: understanding
what my role is, understanding
the way our system was designed
and is supposed to work. I’m an
optimistic person by nature. ...
will approach this by bringing
that and my experience as a
judge, my experience as a person
in the world and my interest in
making it all work.Q: You talked to the students
about the court “role modeling.”
What does that mean?
A: What that means is that judges
are deciding disputes, real
disputes between real people, and
using the law to do that, applying
legal principles and precedents.
... It’s important that people
understand that judges aren’t
making things up just from their
own personal views of how the
world should work. That’s the
policymakers — the policymakers
get to look out in the world and
say, “Oh, this is a terrible thing.
Let’s write a law to solve this
problem.” That’s not what judges
do. Judges are trying to articulate
what the law requires in the
context of a particular case. And
there’s something very concrete
about that, and there’s something
that requires an understanding,
in my view, of actual parties and
problems of real people.Q: What was your response when
you when you saw the draft leak
[of a Supreme Court opinion that
would strike down Roe v. Wade ]?
A: Everybody who is familiar
with the court and the way in
which it works was shocked by
that. Such a departure from
normal order.Q: Do you think it was a good
thing or a bad thing?
A: I can’t answer that.Q: What do you think about
peaceful protests outside of
Supreme Court justices’ homes?
A: I don’t have any comment.Q: Back to your personal side.
Guilty pleasure?
A: “Survivor.” I love “Survivor.” It’s
the best show ever.Q: Tell me why.
A: Because it’s like a social
experiment. It’s human nature,
what do people do when they’re
starving and how do they react to
one another? It’s like this
Hobbesian state of nature: How
are we going to deal with this
situation? I love it.Q: Is there anything that you
want people to know about you as
you embark on this role?
A: That I take my responsibilities
very seriously. That I’m a mom
and a real person and a wife and
doing the best that I can. Judges
are human beings. We have a duty
that we focus on and that we take
seriously. And it’s hard because
the nature of our work involves
resolving disputes, so someone is
always going to be disappointed,
someone’s going to lose. But in
our society, we’ve agreed that this
is the way in which disputes get
resolved. We’ve agreed on the
process. And I’m so honored to be
a part of that.than everybody else.
A: I think that there is some of
that, but obviously law and
judging is different than politics. I
don’t see myself as coming with
deliverables, like I was appointed
to reach a certain outcome or a
result or anything like that. That’s
not the way law works. But I do
feel it’s important for me to
continue doing what I do as a
judge: Writing opinions that are
clear, that people understand,
that are consistent with the law
and legal principles.Q: About the confirmation
process: The only time you got
really emotional was when Sen.
Cory Booker (D-N.J.) talked about
the fact that you had earned this.
A: It was his entire speech and the
point at which it came in the
context of the hearing. It had
been 18 hours of questioning. I
was exhausted and also, in a
sense, relieved — it felt like
someone understood how
difficult it had been and how
much this particular position
meant to a lot of people. That sort
of aspect of it hadn’t really come
out very much in the hearing, and
so it was a breath of fresh air, a
relief in the moment that I think
just led to emotion.Q: A lot of confirmation hearings
have a kind of Kabuki quality to
them. What surprised you the
most?
A: I don’t think I was really that
surprised by anything. I had
studied very hard. I had watched
prior hearings. I knew that I’d get
some tough questions from some
senators. It was just a test of
endurance.Q: You have repeated in almost
every talk that you’ve given about
your love for country, your
reverence for the Constitution.
But the Supreme Court is under
attack right now, and you’re
coming to the court at a time of
almost unprecedented
controversy, heightened emotions
and perceptions of politicization.
How does that make you
approach this seat that you’rerespected jurist in the Second
Circuit. All of those things made it
possible for me to see myself as
following in a similar path.Q: Talk about the pressure of
being a role model, the pressure
of being the first Black female
justice.
A: Well, it’s a work in progress.
I’m so honored to have so many
people who have encouraged me,
who have supported me and who
view this as a really important
step for our country and for our
society. It’s not about me
personally, in a sense. I’m
embodying this progress that
many people feel we’re making by
having me appointed to this seat.
And so it’s pretty daunting in a lot
of ways.
I feel prepared because I’ve
been one of a handful of African
Americans doing what I do at this
level for a while. It’s not unfamiliar
to me to be a “first” or an “only” or
whatever small group of people
who are performing in legal circles
like this — obviously nothing like
as momentous as this.Q: What does being a first mean
in practical terms?
A: It means you feel the weight of
wanting to succeed, not just for
you in your own independent
status, but because so many
people are watching and view this
as a door opening for others. I
know in the past I’ve felt, “Gosh,
I’ve really got to do well here so
that other people will have this
opportunity down the line.” That I
might be the first, but I don’t
want to be the last, and it’s on my
shoulders to make sure that I
leave a good impression so that
others can follow.Q: It seems like it also could lead
to a lot of unrealistic
expectations. On the night that
President Barack Obama was
elected, people were so excited.
And then later on, people were
disappointed because he couldn’t
fix everything overnight. So
there’s tremendous amount of
pressure to not just be good but to
be the best ever, to work harderchance to sit and hear him discuss
it, or to look at drafts that he had
written of opinions and the way
in which he analyzed things — it’s
the kind of experience that can’t
really be replicated.Q: L ast role model: Constance
Baker Motley, with whom you
share a birthday. You’ve cited her
a number of times as being an
important influence.
A: She was the first Black female
federal judge. She was a part of the
civil rights movement and was one
of a handful, if not even less, of
women who worked with
Thurgood Marshall and other men.
It meant that a woman of color,
a Black woman, could become a
judge — I didn’t know any other
Black female judges coming up. I
read about her life and the
contributions that she made —
she did a lot of pro bono work in
representing people who were
trying to secure rights in our
society. And then she became a
judge, and she was a verywriting skills in a different way
with him, the attention to detail,
the way in which he would work
with the law clerks in crafting
opinions was really something
that I had not seen up until that
point.Q: And Justice Breyer?
A: It’s hard to even describe the
degree of influence in terms of just
his character. He is the ultimate
consensus builder, the one who
was always trying to forge
consensus, build bridges, talk to
the justices who disagreed with
him about issues. My memories of
him are of him constantly coming
out of his internal office saying,
“I’ve got to go talk to Sandra, I’ve
got to go talk to Tony” — Justice
[Sandra Day] O’Connor, Anthony
M. Kennedy — because he was
always trying to come up with
something that we could all agree
on.
He’s just extraordinary in his
thought processes about the way
the law works. So just having theThey debated the Constitution,
precedents, age limits for federal
judges (“I’ve seen people who age
very gracefully,” said Jackson, 51,
to laughter), career choices and
networking: “It literally takes a
village to make a judge.” And then,
of course , a line for selfies.
After meeting with the stu-
dents, Jackson sat down with The
Washington Post to discuss role
models, the pressure of being the
first Black female justice and tear-
ing up during the confirmation
hearing. (The interview has been
lightly edited for clarity and
length.)
Q: Y ou love mentoring?
A: People ask me, “How did you
get to this point? What was
important for you?” And it really
was the high school debate coach
who took an interest in me and
encouraged me, and the many
judges that I had the opportunity
the clerk for. And so I know how
important it is — not just to have
the books and materials and be
able to read and write in the
abstract or in isolation, but to have
someone who takes an interest in
you. I’d like to be that kind of a role
model for young people.
Q: I want to talk about some of
your personal role models and
what specifically you learned. So
we’ll start with your father, who
went to law school when you were
A: I literally remember sitting at
the kitchen table with his big law
treatises and case books.
Studying, hard work, discipline,
being able to set aside what’s
going on and actually doing
homework. We lived at the
University of Miami. And so just
being immersed in a college
campus environment, when I was
that young and knowing that my
dad was a student, I think was
something that really helped to
motivate me to understand the
importance of education. My
mother was a teacher and became
a principal, so my parents, both of
them, were always very focused
on education. I think that made it
something that was not only
something to which I aspired but
also attainable for me.
Q: What did he tell you about why
he wanted to be a lawyer? What
did you learn about law at his
knee?
A: My dad and my mother grew
up under segregation in Florida.
There’s something about being
subject to a legal system that you
consider to be unfair that I think
gave him the motivation to want
to understand it and potentially
work to change it. To be able to
make the kinds of changes that I
think he was interested in, in sort
of a global sense, he felt he needed
to study the law — and I learned
law as an instrument of change.
Q: Do you see it the same way?
A: Oh, absolutely.
Q: I’m going to get to retiring
Justice Stephen G. Breyer, but you
had two other judges as mentors.
A: I clerked for a district court
judge, Patti Saris in
Massachusetts. She’s has become
a lifelong friend and mentor of
mine in the real world — she had,
I think, four children, and her
youngest child was young when I
was clerking for her. So the work/
life balance, being a working
mom. Hearing cases, ruling on
things, and then coming back into
chambers and taking a call from
her kid who was a kindergartner,
talking to the teacher.
Q: There was a 2017 speech in
which you addressed the idea of
trying to be a mother and a judge.
If I remember correctly, it was
along the lines of you can’t have it
all at the same time.
A: I think you can, but I think you
have to be comfortable with
perhaps not being perfect at
everything all the time. There are
things that you have to kind of let
go — “This is good enough” —
because it’s very hard to do
everything at once at such a high
level.
Q: Your second clerkship?
A: My second clerkship was with
Bruce Selya, who is on the First
Circuit, and it was a court of
appeals clerkship. I learned
JACKSON FROM C1
H ow her
parents
shaped
Jackson
MARVIN JOSEPH/THE WASHINGTON POSTMARVIN JOSEPH/THE WASHINGTON POSTJABIN BOTSFORD/THE WASHINGTON POST
FROM TOP: Supreme Court Justice-designate Ketanji
Brown Jackson poses with School Without Walls students
Anne Hedgepeth, 17, left, and Sanaa Hines, 18; Jackson
walks with Vice President Harris and President Biden
departs after a White House gathering to c elebrate
Jackson’s confirmation to the Supreme Court; J ackson
speaks with School Without Walls students at the U.S.
Courthouse in D.C.